Re: Navigation question
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:59:17 GMT
Message-ID: <9anBh.7329$R71.109467_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> Let's see. You've been working on database applications since when? Since
> the 1980s?
> And you're just now getting around to understanding what others mean by
> "database navigation"?
> The mind boggles.
>
> Surely you can't be seruious!
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:59:17 GMT
Message-ID: <9anBh.7329$R71.109467_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Walt wrote:
> "dawn" <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1171574371.596968.244380_at_p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
>>On Feb 14, 2:22 pm, "Carl Federl" <cfed..._at_yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>><Do large, production-quality, highly usable and useful, data-based, >>>read-and-write software applications actually exist where there is no >>>code in the software that navigates around the database? >>> >>>Yes, there are many large, production-quality, highly usable and >>>useful that do not have any database navigation performed by the >>>application. >> >>The formatting on this one isn't easy for me to read, Carl, but I'll >>give it a spin. I'm working to figure out precisely what "database >>navigation" means to others, particularly to those who oppose it. So, >>from this statement I believe that there are such applications that >>perform no "navigation" as you understand the term, which might not be >>how I have previously understood the term.
>
> Let's see. You've been working on database applications since when? Since
> the 1980s?
> And you're just now getting around to understanding what others mean by
> "database navigation"?
> The mind boggles.
>
> Surely you can't be seruious!
She might actually be that ignorant. Regardless how serious, she is not sincere. Received on Fri Feb 16 2007 - 19:59:17 CET